APHC010477802026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] SATURDAY, THE 19th DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 8042/2026 Between: 1. S JAYA CHITRA ALIAS SINDHU, C/O. DINESH,AGE 27 YRS, OCC HOUSEHOLD, R/O. 3, OTHAVADAI STREET,THIRU VI KA NAGAR, SEMBIAM VILLAGE POST,CHENNAI, TAMIL NADU STATE. ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, rep by its Public Prosecutor,High Court of Andhra PradeshAt Amaravati. ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. D PURNACHANDRA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following: ORDER: The Criminal Petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity ‘the BNSS’) by the Petitioner/Accused No.3 for granting of pre-arrest bail in connection with Crime No.472 of 2024 of Tirupathi East Urban Police Station, Tirupathi District, was registered for the alleged offence punishable under Sections 74 and 2 118(1) read with 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity, ‘the BNS’). 2. Sri D.Purnachandra Reddy, the learned counsel for the Petitioner, submits that the Petitioner is the innocent of the alleged offence. He is a law- abiding citizen. He has not committed any offence. He is the sole breadwinner of the family. The Petitioner undertakes to strictly adhere to any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. In light of the foregoing submissions, learned counsel prays that the present petition be allowed in the interest of justice. 3. Per contra, Mr.A.Sai Rohith, the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, vehemently opposed the grant of pre-arrest bail to the Petitioner, submitting that the investigation is still underway and several material witnesses remain to be examined. It is contended that if the Petitioner is released on pre-arrest bail, there is a strong likelihood that he may abscond, thereby hampering the ongoing investigation and evading the process of law. Hence, it is urged that the petition be dismissed. 4. Heard the learned counsel for the Petitioner and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor. Perused the record. 5. On perusal of the record, the Petitioner is arraigned as Accused No.3 in this case. The allegation against the Petitioner is that she, along with other co‑accused, went to the house of the de‑facto complainant and, during the quarrel, caught hold of the complainant, thereby facilitating the assault committed by Accused Nos.1 and 2 on the complainant and her mother, 3 Pungavanam. Her act formed part of the same transaction which ultimately resulted in the death of Pungavanam. 6. In view of the specific overt acts attributed against the Petitioner, this Court is not inclined to grant pre-arrest bail to the Petitioner, as it would amount to giving a shield, or protection or license to the Petitioner against whom specific allegations have been made, as per the judgments of the Hon’ble Apex Court in Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia v. State of Panjab 1 and Sushila Aggarwal v. State of (NCT of Delhi)2. 7. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature and gravity of the allegations, and the material available on record, this Court is not inclined to grant pre-arrest bail to the Petitioner/Accused No.3. Accordingly, this Court finds no merit in the Criminal Petition, and the same is liable to be dismissed. 8. In the result, the Criminal Petition is dismissed. As a sequel, Miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, shall stand closed. _________________________ DR. Y. LAKSHMANA RAO, J Date: 19.09.2026 PRA 1(1980) 2 SCC 565 (2020) 5 SCC 1 4 123 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 8042 of 2026 Date: 19.09.2026 PRA